A Phoenix of Liberty Rises

I’m back. It’s been a few years. I’ve been here and there, compiled even more research and have much to put on here for you. Conclusions I have reached that I have to share. I will be going to places I maybe shouldn’t be going to, but I’ll keep pushing it until you tell me to stop.

It’s going to be a little while until I hit my stride, I have lots of comments to approve, spam to clear, templates to reset, links to gather, I need to organise.

I’ll give you more personal thoughts in coming posts.

Thanks for reading.

And as far as the system is concerned? THIS IS WAR.

Advertisements

Rise of the female bankrupt

Mail Online

The number of women declared bankrupt has risen nearly fourfold in just six years.

They now make up almost four out of ten cases, with women under the age of 35 most likely to suffer financial collapse

This means that six years ago women made up 30 per cent of bankrupts, but by last year that had risen to 38 per cent.

Moving towards ‘equality’ eh.

Women are now going bankrupt at the rate of 60 a day. The rapid rise of female financial failure is likely to be linked both to overspending when credit was easy and the vulnerability of growing numbers of women who do not have the backing of marriage and family.

By marriage I think they mean husbands. By family I think they mean fathers.

‘More women are racking up unmanageable debts as they now feel more under pressure to maintain lavish lifestyles,’ a spokesman for price comparison website MoneyExpert.com said.

Under pressure from who?

‘They want to spend it like the Beckhams but don’t have the income to sustain their debts.

Quite simply, they are choosing to live beyond their means which funnily enough wouldn’t really be possible in a capitalist society (one dominated by capital, not credit/debt). You cannot spend what you don’t have. This crisis is twofold, not only do they want to live such lifestyles, they also do not want to live within their means because the restrictions they must live under will make them realise how poor they really are, which if we all did, would drive down living costs, improving the quality of life.

‘Increasingly they have to borrow more to get on the property ladder – and if they live alone there’s no one else to share the burden.’

Independent girlies.

He suggested that too many women had used too many credit cards and ‘lived ahead of their income’.

Accountancy firm Wilkins Kennedy said it had dealt with a rise in numbers of female bankrupts and believed bankruptcy among women would match levels among men later this year.

Speculation by Labour ministers that women are especially vulnerable to being laid off in the recession were dismissed last month by the Office for National Statistics.

It said women are losing jobs at half the rate of men, and are protected because more women than men work in the public sector.

Firstly, why the hell are Liebour ‘ministers’ speculating something that doesn’t exist? Secondly, the public sector is f**king teeming with women, like xenomorphs in ‘Aliens’. It is totally disproportionate, but that’s another subject. In relation to this however, in this socialist shithole, as the wealth creating private sector continues to contract, the wealth destroying public sector is continuing to expand, so the divide will continue to grow, and with more money coming out than going in (like the women in this article) you can see where the government is dragging this nation into.

It really is as simple as it looks. As my dad says, ‘don’t spend what you don’t have’. Under capitalism, you literally CAN’T spend what you don’t have so this issue with debt swallowing everybody up (including those who save) is highly improbable, as opposed to the current central banking dominated debt system in which it is not only inevitable, it is designed to collapse.

(2 – 5) + (2 – 5) +… will always result in accumulating debt. Those in debt are slaves to those who issue the credit. What makes it worse is that people choose to go into debt. They choose to become slaves to try and live another life, which ironically, they end up paying for with their life (body + time = life).

The difference here (and in the U.S.) is that the corporatist state is using this as an excuse to loot those with capital, redistributing it to those in debt, which of course goes directly to the creditor, which are usually owned by the same oligarchy that has orchestrated this (imposed the central banks) in the first place.

Wakey wakey people.

"Denial is the most predictable of all human responses, but rest assured, this will be the sixth time we have destroyed it"  — Architect, Matrix Reloaded

Obama’s Plan To “Geo-Engineer” The Planet Mirrors CFR Policy Documents

Infowars

The Obama administration’s announcement that it is to consider radical planetary “geo-engineering”, such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays”, exactly mirrors recent publications penned by the elite Council On Foreign Relations.

Yesterday the Associated Press reported that the Obama administration has held discussions regarding the possibility of “geo-engineering” the earth’s climate to counter global warming.

The AP report states that Obama’s science advisor John Holdren is pushing for radical terra forming programs to be explored such as creating an “artificial volcano”. Despite Holdren’s admission that such measures could have “grave side effects,” he added that, “we might get desperate enough to want to use it.”

Such ideas exactly mirror those put forth by the CFR in previous years.

In briefing notes (PDF) published in May 2008 from the CFR’s Geoengineering: Workshop on Unilateral Planetary Scale Geoengineering, the elite internationalist group lays out the exact same radical ideas now being touted by the Obama administration.

The following excerpts are taken from the document:

Geoengineering Strategies

Among all geoengineering schemes, those currently considered most feasible involve increasing the planetary albedo, that is, reflecting more sunlight back into space before it can be absorbed. There are a number of different methods that could be used to increase the planet’s reflectivity:

1. Add more small reflecting particles in the upper part of the atmosphere (the stratosphere which is located between 15 and 50 kilometers above the Earth’s surface).

2. Add more clouds in the lower part of the atmosphere (the troposphere)

3. Place various kinds of reflecting objects in space either near the earth or at a stable location between the earth and the sun.

4. Change large portions of the planet’s land cover from things that are dark (absorbing) such as trees to things that are light (reflecting) such as open snowcover or grasses.

[…]

Stratospheric Aerosols that might be engineered to migrate to particular regions (e.g. over the arctic) or to rise above the stratospher (so as not to interfere in stratospheric chemistry).

Adding more of the right kind of fine particles to the stratosphere can increase the amount of sunlight that is reflected back into space.

Applied to geoengineering, various technologies could be used to loft particles into the stratosphere, such as naval guns, rockets, hot air balloons or blimps, or a fleet of highflying aircraft. Potential types of particles for injection include sulfur dioxide, aluminum oxide dust or even designer self-levitating aerosols.

The CFR’s geo-engineering research program is directed by David G. Victor a Professor at Stanford Law School and an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. Also involved are M. Granger Morgan, head of Carnegie Mellon University’s Department of Engineering, Jay Apt, Professor of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University, and John Steinbruner, Professor of Public Policy and Director of the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland.

In an article entitled The Geoengineering Option: A Last Resort Against Global Warming? published in this month’s Foreign Affairs, the CFR’s monthly magazine, the directors once again lay out their ideas for planetary terraforming, calling for a worldwide 60-80 percent cut in carbon emissions.

Obama’s push toward a so called “cap and trade” carbon taxation program is also a direct descendant of Victor et al’s CFR policy formation.

A CFR geo-engineering meeting summary document from 1999 (PDF pages 12,13,14) also categorically states that the ultimate goal under “A technology strategy for global warming” is the implementation of a global Carbon Tax.

The memo also pedantically explains how the perceived fear of global warming can be used to sell to Americans what is essentially a tax on air:

“While taxing tea pales in comparison to taxing air as a perceived government affront, the clear benefits of a taxation policy to combat global warming might convince even the descendents of our tax-resistant Founding Fathers.”

The tentative announcement by the Obama administration of the existence of geoengineering research programs is a first step toward introducing the idea to the wider public.

However, as we highlighted in our master article yesterday, geo-engineering is undoubtedly already being conducted by government-affiliated universities, government agencies, and on a mass scale through chemtrail spraying.

Such programs merely scratch the surface of what is likely to be a gargantuan and overarching black-budget funded project to terraform the planet, with little or no care for the unknown environmental consequences this could engender.

Further Research: Here is an extremely valuable file folder containing 8 PDFs, all published by the CFR, and all concerning their Geo-Engineering Program.

To view related links and more articles, go here.

Jacqui Smith, typical feminist

Mail Online

Jacqui Smith astonishingly claimed yesterday that she was the victim of a smear campaign over her expenses because she is a woman with no independent wealth.

The embattled Home Secretary defended her claims for household items, including an 88p bath plug, as ‘fair and reasonable’ in a series of interviews to try to put the expenses controversy behind her.

By designating her sister’s house as her main home, Miss Smith has been free to claim more than £140,000 from the taxpayer-funded Additional Costs Allowance to run her family home.

In what will be interpreted as an attack on wealthy Tory MPs, she said: ‘This is a system put in place so people can be MPs who do not start off with two places to live but need two places to live in order to do the job properly.

‘If we want people to be MPs who do not start off with two places to live there has to be a process. What I claim is what I think are fair and reasonable expenses for the fact that I have to live in two places.’

Pressed on why she did not register as her main home the constituency property where her husband and children live, she said: ‘Effectively we separated my main home from my family home. . . When I became an MP, my husband and I had to make a decision knowing I would spend more time in London.’

But she added: ‘I know people think, "Well, your family live in Redditch so why isn’t that your main home?" I know that people find that  -  particularly for a woman  -  they find that difficult.’

She gets to her position because she is a woman (if definitely isn’t because she’s competent), starts raping the taxpayer like a common purpose/ champagne socialist always does, and when people start demanding she is held to account for her actions, she claims they are only doing that because she is a woman.

In other words, she feels she should be able to do what she wants because she is a woman. That is feminism for you.

Do not ask for whom the bell tolls……

Old Holborn

It tolls for thee, yeoman of the land of Magna Carta.

Whilst you slumbered last night, and in the many months before, the sinister shape of Directive 2006/24/EC crept into your lives and stole your freedom and your privacy.

Would it have made any difference if this burglar had worn a striped jumper and carried a bag marked ‘swag’ – probably not, for you slept soundly, happily believing that if you voted for a new government – when someone else got round to organising an election, when someone else handed out leaflets, when someone else hired a loud speaker and toured your streets – if you put your cross on a different name, you could go on with your cosy life, untroubled.

You were quite happy to believe that it really wasn’t your concern.

You ‘tutted’ over that ‘racist mob’ the BNP. You ‘clucked’ at the alarmist stories in the Daily Mail. You ‘grumbled’ when you found your litter bin installed with a tracker device. Then you went on and re-mortgaged your house, marvelled at your good fortune, ran up your credit card, bought a new car, bought those ridiculous shoes that you couldn’t walk in, and settled down to watch reality TV. You may even have turned on the computer and read some of the blogs, ‘clucked’ again at the comments, and departed, never bothering to leave your point of view.

Never standing up to be counted. It wasn’t really your concern.

Someone else would sort it out for you. Someone else would make a fool of themselves, demanding smaller government, demanding to be left alone to organise their own life, supporting the Libertarian Party, being seen as a ‘conspiracist’.

Today it’s too late.

Today 52% of the population is dependent on retaining a Labour government for the very food in their bellies. Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas.

Today the government spend 43% of your wages on supporting, amongst other things, that 52% of the population.

Today the government has hung a debt of £33,000 round the neck of each of your children.

Today, Directive 2006/24/EC means that the government will be monitoring every e-mail you send, every friend you make on the ubiquitous Facebook, every mobile phone call you make, every time you log onto this or any other web page.

You can’t even ‘tut’ and ‘grumble’ amongst yourselves in private any more.

Now who will stand up to be counted?

False rape Conviction

You don’t see that everyday.

Before I quote the article, I want to provide a little background research on sentencing for rape, as to provide some context. The following is taken from www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk, from ‘Rape Advice’, available here as a pdf, unless otherwise indicated.

Firstly, the definition of ‘rapist’ does not seem to apply to women.

Section 142 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 sets the definition of rape as follows;

Rape of women and men

For section 1 of the [1956 c. 69.] Sexual Offences Act 1956 (rape of a woman) there shall be substituted the following section—

“1 Rape of woman or man

(1) It is an offence for a man to rape a woman or another man.

(2) A man commits rape if—

(a) he has sexual intercourse with a person (whether vaginal or anal) who at the time of the intercourse does not consent to it; and

(b) at the time he knows that the person does not consent to the intercourse or is reckless as to whether that person consents to it.

(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.

(4) Subsection (2) applies for the purpose of any enactment.”.

In fact, the rape section of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (c.69) is entirely male specific, except in the event of incest where the law is equally applied. In the Rape Advice document, there is advice to further entrench male-only rape;

In   its   consultative   report 1,   the   Home   Office   Sex   Offences   Review recommended that the statutory definition of rape should be extended to include any penetration   by   the   penis   of   the   anus,   mouth   or   genitalia.

So according to the Act, as women don’t have a penis (and they are not male) that must mean they cannot rape, right?

The section on Male Rape makes no mention of female criminality either, one would think it was written by feminists. In regards to average sentence lengths;

As can be seen from the sentencing statistics summarized at Annex A to this paper, the  average  sentence for an adult offender  sentenced  to  immediate  custody  for rape in 2000 was 7 years 4 months (7 years 6 months on a not guilty plea and 6 years 10 months on a guilty plea). The majority of sentences (57%) fell within the range 5-10 years,  but  25%  of  offenders  received  sentences  of  under  5  years,  and  17%  were sentenced   to   more   than   10   years   (including   10%   whose   sentence   was   life imprisonment).

The document highlights the circumstances of a life sentence for repeat offenders.

37.       The Panel also agrees with the Court of Appeal’s description, in  Billam, of the circumstances in which it will be appropriate to consider a life sentence. A defendant who has a previous conviction for rape or another ‘serious offence’ will be subject to an automatic sentence of life imprisonment under section 109 of the Powers of Criminal

So in summary, the average length for rape is 7 years 1 month. Repeat offenders get an automatic life sentence. That is what a man is expecting to get if he is found guilty of rape, something that can happen based on no more evidence than hear-say from a woman. (A consequence of abuse industry campaigning to push up the number of convictions for rape, remove the ancient requirement of burden of proof, or necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit.) With proof being no longer needed, and a long list of false rape accusers getting no sentence whatsoever, even being protected by law, the feminists are getting what they want. Now to the article.

Estranged wife jailed for falsely accusing husband of sex attack

A man has told of the pain and humiliation he endured when his estranged wife falsely accused him of rape.

Anthony Scoones, 27, spoke out after Gemma Scoones was jailed for a year for perverting the course of justice.

One year, of which she’ll do less than half. I think they have to use the charge of ‘perjury’ because there is no charge of ‘false rape’.

He described how he was arrested at his home  -  he was watching TV in bed when police arrived  -  and spent 16 hours in a cell.

His clothes were taken for forensic examination and he was left naked so that DNA samples could be taken.

Mr Scoones said: ‘I wasn’t just stripped of my clothes, but of my dignity. I was stood there naked, with two police officers at one side of me and a doctor at the other side, having swabs taken from all over my body.

‘It was humiliating and degrading. I don’t blame the officers for investigating, but it is a heinous crime to be accused of and I’m still having nightmares now.’

To add to his ordeal, even some people he thought of as friends doubted his innocence.

The rape accusation was part of an ‘acrimonious separation’ from his 26-year-old wife.

Durham Crown Court heard that she told police Mr Scoones followed her home from a shop, forced his way into the house and raped her in a downstairs toilet.

She claimed she was hurt but had not been able to call police immediately because he threatened to petrol-bomb her house.

It was only after discrepancies emerged in a police interview with her that Mr Scoones was told he was in the clear and his ex-wife was charged with committing an act intended to pervert the course of justice.

Jailing Scoones, who had pleaded guilty, Recorder Neil Davey told her: ‘The course you embarked on was one of sheer wickedness.’

Mr Smith said: ‘She was upset and this built up in her as time went on. She accepts there was a degree of planning and she considered her actions for  several weeks.’

Premeditated. Kudos to the Police for actually investigating it and not just throwing the poor man to the wolves. But this isn’t the first time this has happened. Here are a few more from the Endofmen archives.

Another false rape claim, results in ‘modest’ sentence

A binge-drinking mother has been jailed after falsely accusing an innocent taxi driver of raping her.

Joanne Rye, who kept up the lie for 20 months, was told by a judge her behaviour was despicable and was handed an eight-month prison sentence.

Another man falsely accused of rape – To ‘teach him a lesson’

Women makes false rape claim – Jailed for ONE YEAR

Jailed: The ‘evil’ 21-year-old who seduced soldier and then accused him of rape

Man hangs himself after being falsely accused of raping women and children

Repeat offender, life sentence, remember?

Woman who falsely cried rape FIVE times – Gets SUSPENDED sentence

False rape accuser given 4 months

Another False Allegation of Rape – victim serves almost 7 years.

This is obviously just the tip of the iceberg. Here are some articles regarding the rise of false rape/ abuse accusations.

False Rape Accusations May Be More Common Than Thought

Half of all Rape Charges May Be False

In the UK today you can be accused of abuse on almost no evidence and without any proper witnesses to support the story

An alarming national trend: False Rape Allegations

Save the British pub, Axe the Beer Tax

The point of the socialist governments attack on public drinking houses is simple; The pub is a location for people to congregate, socialise and communicate. Throughout history they have been critical in enabling people to meet and organise themselves, in regards to local government or the state. They would much prefer independent pubs to close, to be replaced by generic chain ‘bars’ because they are easier to control.

Man tries to buy a pint in Wetherspoons

This is the same thing that is happening with the police, the GP surgeries etc. Centralise it under the State. It also presents an opportunity for the pig bastard state to leech more money off of you, among other things, like conditioning the public to ‘show your papers schnell!!!’.

None of it is necessary, none of it needs to exist. Please visit these sites for more info, I hope you will find them useful.

Axe The Beer Tax

Save the Pub campaign

Gordon Brown pushes New World Order (again)

Mail Online

Gordon Brown has made an overtly religious call for a new world order based on the ‘deep moral sense’ shared by all faiths.

Making the first speech by a serving Prime Minister at St Paul’s Cathedral in London, he quoted scripture as he urged people to unite to forge a new ‘global society’.

The Prime Minister argued that through all faiths, traditions and heritages runs a ‘single powerful modern sense demanding responsibility from all and fairness to all’.

He quoted the Christian doctrine of ‘do to others what you would have them do unto you’ and highlighted similar principles in Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Sikhism.

‘They each and all reflect a sense that we share the pain of others, and a sense that we believe in something bigger than

ourselves – that we cannot be truly content while others face despair, cannot be completely at ease while others live in fear, cannot be satisfied while others are in sorrow,’ he said.

‘We all feel, regardless of the source of our philosophy, the same deep moral sense that each of us is our brother and sisters’ keeper . . . we cannot and will not pass by on the other side when people are suffering and when we have it within our power to help.’

He went on to suggest the world economy and society should be rebuilt around a Zulu word for hope – themba – which is also an acronym for ‘there must be an alternative’.

Well the alternative of the elite ruling classes, is a totalitarian global socialist dictatorship where the human race is enslaved by technology.

But I don’t think they’re puppets are going to be admitting that soon, although only a few years ago, researchers claiming there is a ‘new world order’ scheme in place where labelled ‘nuts’.

UPDATE: The next day the Mail Online is running the title The trillion dollar question: Will Gordon Brown’s ‘New World Order’ pay off? on its front page.

I think this would be a good time to revisit the New World Order gun edition, and also this picture I took (March 2007) of a local ‘news’ paper.

And for those new to the phrase ‘new world order’ I suggests doing some research. You can begin with The New World Order (NWO) an overview and New World Order doesn’t exist!

In fact, searching for the phrase on this blog pulls up a large number of articles.

‘Will you open fire on UK citizens’ Army personnel being asked

Similar to the plans afoot in the United States, to turn the Army on its people and impose totalitarianism.

Please read this, from PJC Journal.

In a stunning conversation with a friend, who is a serving member of the Armed Forces, over the weekend, it was revealed that transfers to regiments and other units in the UK on home duties are being undertaken by the MOD based upon whether an individual was prepared to ‘open fire’ on UK citizens during civil disturbances.

I found this long and extracted conversation to be both bizarre and frightening. I will state at this point that he is someone that I have known for years, and trust implicitly. The fact that service personnel are actually being asked in special briefing sessions whether they would fire on their own nationals indicates that the rumours about the Army being put on standby are indeed very true.

Read the full article here.

‘Politically incorrect’ to be superior to your competition

Everyone is ‘equal’ under communism, didn’t ya know…

Daily Mail

For generations of young footballers, being soundly thrashed by a rival team has been a tough, if character-building, rite of passage.

But the days of double-digit goal tallies may be numbered.

Some officials want the Football Association to introduce a so-called ‘mercy rule’ in youth soccer.

An import from the United Socialist States, the rule means that if one team achieves a certain goal advantage over another the match is declared over, thus sparing the losers further humiliation.

Supporters claim such a move would prevent youngsters from becoming prematurely disillusioned with the beautiful game.

But critics insist it will also deprive them of a vital life skill: Dealing with utter defeat.

Equality, Marx-style

Equality, Marx-style

But that is what the state wants, a generation of people incapable of dealing with anything. That way you’ll run to the state for help with everything, thus putting them in the position of your ‘keeper’. Everyone who lives in the real world knows that getting your butt whooped at a game is a humiliating experience (especially if it is playing Soul Calibur 2 and its by your bloody girlfriend who just button bashes and Perfects you, and then goes on about it for ages and ages and bloody ages, telling all your mates about it and… well nevermind). Just makes you want to get even. In the game I mean.

The Mid Lincolnshire League is calling on the FA to bring in rules which would mean that if a nine-goal gap opened up between teams, then the game would stop.

Ron Westerman, chairman of the Mid Lincs Youth League, in which more than 6,000 children aged up to 13 play in 400 teams, said: ‘We’d not be taking away victory or defeat, merely lessening its severity. Scorelines of 25-0 don’t do anyone any favours, especially at age eight to ten.

‘We’ve asked the FA to consider bringing this in nationwide, but at the moment it’s just one of many things up for consultation.’

Come on. Who only wants to beat the other team a little bit? You want to crush their morale, shatter their confidence, and generally let them know that they suck. That’s the FUN!

The rule already operates unofficially in Devon’s Pioneer youth league. Now both counties want the FA to adopt the idea more widely, saying it will encourage more youngsters to enjoy the game.

But sceptics believe such measures merely provide a politically correct comfort blanket for children against the realities of the wider world.

Robert Whelan, deputy director of think-tank Civitas, said: ‘We’re being over-protective with youngsters but doing them no favours. It’s a symptom of a society that wants to protect the young from anything unpleasant at all costs.

Molly coddling it’s called. It encourages infantilism and dependence on the entity doing the nannying. Reminds me of those ‘eaters’ who live to feed their significant other, fattening them up like you wouldn’t believe so they become completely incapable of doing things for themselves.

‘But the fact is that life can sometimes be unpleasant and you don’t always win – and sometimes you lose by a big margin.

‘Life throws down challenges to you, and sometimes it lays you flat on your back, but you have to learn to pick yourself up again, and you won’t develop that spirit if no one ever allows you to lose.’

Indeed. But that spirit would be tantamount to competition wouldn’t it, and we know the state doesn’t like that.

Tory MP Julian Brazier described the idea as ‘terribly sad’, adding: ‘How can you really appreciate a fantastic win, if you’ve never experienced a crushing defeat?’

But Devon FA chief executive Paul Morrison said: ‘People talk about defeats being character building, but children are more vulnerable these days and we don’t want to put them off playing the game because they are thrashed.

No they bloody aren’t. It is the adults that are more vunerable, and projecting that nonsense onto the children. Defeat is part and parcel of life. Typical socialist agenda, drag down the highest achievers, using the others’ feelings as an excuse, and with no trailblazers to set the bar, how much damage do you think that will do to the development of these kids.

‘A women’s team I know lost 42-0 one Saturday, and within three weeks they’d disbanded. These days it should be about enjoyment and player development, rather than winning at all costs.’

Obviously these women couldn’t handle defeat, that’s their problem (42-nil HAHAHAHA) not the rest of the football league. What next? Teams that get hammered taking the better team to court and seeking damages for ‘hurt self-esteem?’

Fucking pussies.

Japan Society of Energy and Resources: Climate science is ‘ancient astrology’

The Register

Exclusive Japanese scientists have made a dramatic break with the UN and Western-backed hypothesis of climate change in a new report from its Energy Commission.

Three of the five researchers disagree with the UN’s IPCC view that recent warming is primarily the consequence of man-made industrial emissions of greenhouse gases. Remarkably, the subtle and nuanced language typical in such reports has been set aside.

One of the five contributors compares computer climate modelling to ancient astrology. Others castigate the paucity of the US ground temperature data set used to support the hypothesis, and declare that the unambiguous warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century has ceased.

The report by Japan Society of Energy and Resources (JSER) is astonishing rebuke to international pressure, and a vote of confidence in Japan’s native marine and astronomical research. Publicly-funded science in the West uniformly backs the hypothesis that industrial influence is primarily responsible for climate change, although fissures have appeared recently. Only one of the five top Japanese scientists commissioned here concurs with the man-made global warming hypothesis.

JSER is the academic society representing scientists from the energy and resource fields, and acts as a government advisory panel. The report appeared last month but has received curiously little attention. So The Register commissioned a translation of the document – the first to appear in the West in any form. Below you’ll find some of the key findings – but first, a summary.

Read the full article here

Summer of rage ‘fears’ – UK

Something that doesn’t exist is being promoted via the media. Why? Well for me, it is just another problem-reaction-solution. Get protests going, get agent provocateurs involved to escalate the situation, bring the Army onto British soil and use the Civil Contingencies Act to cancel elections and establish a dictatorship. Note the propaganda in this piece.

Yahoo

More than a third of voters believe the Army will have to be brought in to deal with a “summer of rage” on British streets as the recession bites, a poll showed.

They never polled me. Where did this poll come from?

The widespread fear of serious unrest was disclosed as a senior police officer warned activists were planning unrest and could find rioters easier to recruit because of the credit crunch.

Superintendent David Hartshorn, who heads the Metropolitan Police’s public order branch, said known activists were planning a return to the streets centred on April’s G20 summit of world leaders in London.

And intelligence shows they may be able to call on more “footsoldiers” than normal due to the unprecedented conditions – which have led to youth violence in Greece and mass protests elsewhere in Europe.

Um, yes, where they had cops dressed up as ‘activists’ and burn and smash stuff up. Allegedly this has happened in the UK recently, and here is a quote from the former Italian president regarding dealing with student protests; “use agent provocateurs to start riots and then have the police “beat the shit out of the protesters”

YouGov polling for Prospect magazine found 37% thought such “serious social unrest in several British cities” was certain or likely – although a slim majority (51%) disagreed.

That isn’t a slim majority, and we have no details regarding numbers polled, their loyalties etc, so the poll doesn’t really mean much, it does however offer an opportunity to sway public opinion by claiming to represent it

And a clear majority (64%) also favoured forcing the under-25s to do a year of full-time, modestly-paid community service such as working with the sick and elderly or helping with environmental projects.

Riiiight, like Obama’s youth core? No that isn’t socialist at all is it.

Labour MP Frank Field told Prospect the main political parties should join forces to develop the idea. He said: “The time has come to look at this idea. A new bipartisan commission should be established to look into how it could be done, perhaps led by figures as respected as David Blunkett or David Davis.”

Although the biggest support for a compulsory scheme was among the older generations, a majority of 18-30 year olds (52%) also gave it their backing.

So… They want to take taxpayers money, and expand the state even more by employing the young to serve the government. Fuck off.

Gordon Brown‘s spokesman said: “The Prime Minister’s view on this is that of course he understands people’s concerns and he also understands that people are angry, for example about the behaviour of some of the banks. That’s why he is absolutely determined that the Government does everything possible to deal with those concerns and help people and businesses get through what is a global recession.”

Yes but people are mainly pissed off at the government, at these greedy self centered wankers and their complete lack of care for the People or the principles of freedom. The actions of the government has precipitated this disgusting state of affairs, the goal of which has always been to destroy Britain as a sovereign nation, permanently, as per the instruction of their Bilderberger masters and their plans for a one world socialist dictatorship government. Remember, this wasn’t incompetence or whatever excuses they want to spew. It was calculated.

The tax on civilisation coming…

NY Times

WASHINGTON — The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to act for the first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet, according to top Obama administration officials.

The environmental agency is under order from the Supreme Court to make a determination whether carbon dioxide is a pollutant that endangers public health and welfare, an order that the Bush administration essentially ignored despite near-unanimous belief among agency experts that research points inexorably to such a finding.

Carbon dioxide ‘as pollutant’, the agenda the globalists have been pushing for decades to help consolidate global power in the hands of their international organisations (global government) for a gas that exists in trace amounts in the atmosphere;

Composition

78.08% Nitrogen (N2)
20.95% Oxygen (O2)
0.93% Argon
0.038% Carbon dioxide
About 1% water vapor (varies with climate)

…which is a vital component of photosynthesis;

In plants, algae and cyanobacteria photosynthesis uses carbon dioxide and water, releasing oxygen as a waste product. Photosynthesis is crucially important for life on Earth, since as well as it maintaining the normal level of oxygen in the atmosphere, nearly all life either depends on it directly as a source of energy, or indirectly as the ultimate source of the energy in their food.

… who’s increase in the atmosphere, could explain the blooming biomass;

The results surprised Steven Running of the University of Montana and Ramakrishna Nemani of NASA, scientists involved in analyzing the NASA satellite data. They found that over a period of almost two decades, the Earth as a whole became more bountiful by a whopping 6.2%. About 25% of the Earth’s vegetated landmass — almost 110 million square kilometres — enjoyed significant increases and only 7% showed significant declines. When the satellite data zooms in, it finds that each square metre of land, on average, now produces almost 500 grams of greenery per year.

Why the increase? Their 2004 study, and other more recent ones, point to the warming of the planet and the presence of CO2, a gas indispensable to plant life. CO2 is nature’s fertilizer, bathing the biota with its life-giving nutrients. Plants take the carbon from CO2 to bulk themselves up — carbon is the building block of life — and release the oxygen, which along with the plants, then sustain animal life. As summarized in a report last month, released along with a petition signed by 32,000 U. S. scientists who vouched for the benefits of CO2: “Higher CO2 enables plants to grow faster and larger and to live in drier climates. Plants provide food for animals, which are thereby also enhanced. The extent and diversity of plant and animal life have both increased substantially during the past half-century.”

… but does not correspond to the fact the planet doesn’t seem to be warming;

Top UN scientists have been forced to admit that natural weather occurrences are having a far greater effect on climate change than CO2 emissions as a continued cooling trend means there has been no global warming since 1998.

… and the global warming scientists’ own predictions are wrong

I have written a number of times about the “global warming accelerating” meme.  The evidence is nearly irrefutable that over the last 10 years, for whatever reason, the pace of global warming has decelerated (click below to enlarge)

This is simply a fact, though of course it does not necessarily “prove” that the theory of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is incorrect.  Current results continue to be fairly consistent with my personal theory, that man-made CO2 may add 0.5-1C to global temperatures over the next century (below alarmist estimates), but that this warming may be swamped at times by natural climactic fluctuations that alarmists tend to under-estimate.

… and so on.

In fact, the science is so far from settled that it cannot be anything other than another motive for these Bilderberg/ global government puppets to push for carbon (life) taxation. Which would be the same as taxing any other completely natural gas. Like oxygen, but I guess that wouldn’t sell so well, to the unthinking masses. Even with predictions of global cooling for the next three decades;

Now a decade later, the global climate has not warmed 1F as forecast by the IPCC but has cooled slightly until 2007-08 when global temperatures turned sharply downward.  In 2008, NASA satellite imagery confirmed that the Pacific Ocean had switched from the warm mode it had been in since 1977 to its cool mode, similar to that of the 1945-1977 global cooling period. The shift strongly suggests that the next several decades will be cooler, not warmer as predicted by the IPCC.

Global warming (i.e, the warming since 1977) is over.  The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming- it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

… and the UN IPCC reports have been proven to be wrong, even deliberately distorted;

Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is “climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007.

.. and yes, even the IPCC admit it themselves;

Ground-breaking admission by member of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change: major contributing factor to the balance of the climate not taken into account.

It would appear that, as many of us right-thinking people have known for some time, global warming caused by CO2 output is, at best, sensationalist fantasy.

We have top rocket scientists saying no evidence CO2 causes warming, even the United States military says it: Army: Sun, Not Man, Is Causing Climate Change, other scientists have released studies completely contradicting the UN reports;

Three top scientists have once again contradicted the claim that a “consensus” exists about man-made global warming with research that indicates CO2 emissions actually cool the atmosphere, in addition to another peer-reviewed paper that documents how the IPCC overstated CO2’s effect on temperature by as much as 2000 per cent.

Professor George Chilingar and Leonid Khilyuk of the University of Southern California, and Oleg Sorokhtin of the Institute of Oceanology of the Russian Academy of Sciences have released a study that they claim completely contradicts the link between CO2 and global temperature increases.

.. and we have large numbers of scientists openly disagreeing with the official THEORY;

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM’s Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

… and the Manhattan Declaration;

We, the scientists and researchers in climate and related fields, economists, policymakers, and business leaders, assembled at Times Square, New York City, participating in the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change,

Resolving that scientific questions should be evaluated solely by the scientific method;

Affirming that global climate has always changed and always will, independent of the actions of humans, and that carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant but rather a necessity for all life;

Recognising that the causes and extent of recently-observed climatic change are the subject of intense debates in the climate science community and that oft-repeated assertions of a supposed ‘consensus’ among climate experts are false;

Affirming that attempts by governments to legislate costly regulations on industry and individual citizens to encourage CO2 emission reduction will slow development while having no appreciable impact on the future trajectory of global climate change.  Such policies will markedly diminish future prosperity and so reduce the ability of societies to adapt to inevitable climate change, thereby increasing, not decreasing human suffering;

Noting that warmer weather is generally less harmful to life on Earth than colder:

… the media has been reporting sensationalist climate nonsense for a century, and still have no idea what they are talking about. The science is not settled, and pushing policies based on dodgy theories with holes so big you could push Al Gores’ electricity bills through, should be illuminating for people. Why are they doing this? Why are they pushing this environmental agenda?

“The threat of environmental crisis will be the ‘international disaster key’ that will unlock the New World Order.” [Mikhail Gorbachev, quoted in “A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind”, by Marilyn Brannan, Associate Editor, Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, p. 5.]

The state can watch you, but you can’t watch the state…

Daily Mail

For rank hypocrisy, look no further than the Government’s inconceivable decision to make it a criminal offence – punishable with a jail term of up to 10 years –  to take a picture of a policeman.

Everywhere we go, the police – under instruction from Ministers – are watching our every move.

There are more than four million CCTV cameras in the UK, the largest number in the world. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras follow our every car journey, and officers are now routinely deployed at major public gatherings with cameras on their helmets.

Police are even beginning to insist that pubs – as a condition of being granted a licence – install CCTV cameras to watch their regulars having a drink.

Our movements are also being tracked using our genetic fingerprints, long after we have left the scene. Hundreds of thousands of people never convicted of any offence now have their DNA stored on the Government’s Big Brother database – the largest in the world.

Yet do the police (or at least their Government masters) mind us watching them in return? Absolutely not. That would never do.

The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000 has been used to stop a staggering 62,584 people at railway stations. Another 87,000 were questioned under separate ‘stop and search’ and ‘stop and account’ legislation.

One schoolboy was even held as a terror suspect for taking photographs of a railway station during a school geography field trip.

Of course, we should not be surprised that the defence for this latest draconian step is counter-terrorism.

Remember, throughout HISTORY, governments have used fear as a pretext for imposing the worst kind of tyranny/ slavery on the population. That is what is happening, nothing less, and if you want more information, read Ian Parker-Joseph’s blog.

Police State: New secret Stasi department set up by ACPO

Section 44 statistics

Gestapo and SOCA – how similar?

Search Gestapo…

This is not a joke. This is deadly serious…

No Ma’am has new posts!

The excellent blooger Rob Fedders has some new posts up on his blog, No Ma’am.

If you haven’t visited it before, now would be a good time to start. It’s a great place to learn about Marxism, the dialectical principle (Hegel) and the truth about feminism, among other things.

ENJOY!

Lisbon Treaty possibly unconstitutional – German Judges

For those wondering if voting yes to the infernal thing could possibly mean anything other than giving your country over to a bunch of scheming deceitful socialist global government scum.

EU Observer

Several of the eight judges in charge of examining whether the EU’s Lisbon Treaty is compatible with the German constitution have expressed scepticism about the constitutional effects of further EU integration.

In all, four of the eight judges questioned the Lisbon Treaty.

The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung noted that the judges were united on one issue: that the treaty is not a work of high literature.

Less-than-clear passages from the treaty were read out aloud, guaranteeing a laugh, noted the paper.

It is designed to be unreadable. Also from EU Observer;

The new EU reform treaty text was deliberately made unreadable for citizens to avoid calls for referendum, one of the central figures in the treaty drafting process has said.

Speaking at a meeting of the Centre for European Reform in London on Thursday (12 July) former Italian prime minister Giuliano Amato said: “They [EU leaders] decided that the document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not constitutional, that was the sort of perception”.

Indeed, I have written extensively on the Lisbon Treaty. Browse the articles for lots of referenced information. From another source (extracts)…

Spiegal Online

There are those in Germany who think the Lisbon Treaty transfers too much responsibility to Brussels. The Constitutional Court is hearing the case this week. Should it agree, then the treaty is dead..

…German parliamentarian Peter Gauweiler, a member of Bavaria’s CSU — the sister party to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s CDU — is among those challenging the Treaty of Lisbon. He argues that the so-called “flexibility clause,” which allows the EU to act in areas not explicitly outlined in the treaty, means that Brussels can intervene as it likes, even in those areas reserved for national legislatures….

Why vote yes for something that has so much potential to destroy your country, with a Treaty that was designed to stop you wanting to read it, purely because they don’t want you to know what is in the damn thing. If in doubt, KICK IT OUT. Isn’t just ‘bloggers’ like me saying it either:

Telegraph: Ireland should vote NO to the Lisbon Treaty.

Libertas.eu